It's reasonably obvious, from replies downthread, who the allegations are about... only a matter of time before names are named.
I think it’s safe to say we should not speculate, I think OGH enjoys having money.
That is the real story of Weinstein.
Sexual harrassment in the workplace is very common in many workplaces, particularly in areas relying on patronage and networking. Jounalism, Media and politics all come into this basket, as we Lib Dems know.
I think the question for us middle-aged white blokes (assuming we're not guilty of harassment ourselves) is whether we've witnessed it, and if so, whether we've done anything about it.
I haven't witnessed it, and have mentored a number of female junior doctors through a number of personal and professional difficulties, none of whom have raised it.
I ha ve my office arranged so that whoever I am meeting is closer to the door, and try to keep such meetings within work hours, so that there are others in the office suite.
You are very wise to organise your meetings in such a manner. But if you have not noticed abuses, perhaps it is time to ask whether your eyes have been fully open. Because in organisations as big as a hospital, it *will* happen.
Workplace romances are a difficult area to navigate, and the maps should be annotated with 'there be dragons', in every sense. Then there are those few sick doctors and nurses who prey on patients ...
If you have any authority over another person, you need to be really careful about how you start a personal relationship with that person.
Mrs Fox works in the same dept, though our rotas are arranged so that we rarely work together, though occasionally meet in the staff room. Hospitals are very female workplaces, and can be emotionally charged, so I know of a number of departmental affairs (some adultorous) but so far as I can tell none were from harassment or attempts at preferment. Mrs Fox always spots the affairs before I notice!
I am not at Mike Pence level of chaperoning, but am careful of inadvertently abusing my position.
Mrs Fox works in the same dept, though our rotas are arranged so that we rarely work together, though occasionally meet in the staff room. Hospitals are very female workplaces, and can be emotionally charged, so I know of a number of departmental affairs (some adultorous) but so far as I can tell none were from harassment or attempts at preferment. Mrs Fox always spots the affairs before I notice!
I am not at Mike Pence level of chaperoning, but am careful of inadvertently abusing my position.
I see it this way, as a rule of thumb:
10% of the population are genuinely stupid - in at least they are unthinking of the consequences of their actions. 1% of the population are genuinely bad 'uns.
You cannot tell the 10% or 1% from looking at them; there are no accurate tests for them prior to them acting. Therefore *any* large organisation will have any number of them in, and you cannot weed the wrong 'uns out until they do something wrong.
Therefore: 1) The important thing is that you react to reports of wrongdoing. Some will be false, either accidentally or malicious. Some will be misunderstandings and innocent, which can result in NFA or training. But the important thing is to act to reports in a timely manner that is fair to all parties.
2) If your organisation has 100 staff, it will have one person who is genuinely a bad 'un. You cannot tell them from looking at them, but they will be there. If you have 1000 employees, there will be at least ten. And so on.
So you may not see harassment (in any direction), but if your organisation is large and has poor procedures, it will be going on. And that's frightening.
To lighten it up a little, a good proportion (10%? 20%) of people are angels. Again they can be hard to tell, especially as the wrong 'uns can hide in angel garb (ref. Saville).
Weinstein has apologised for inappropriate behaviour, but hasn't been convicted of anything.
The law on sexual assault is clear. If you touch someone in a sexual way and you don't have their consent, then you are committing sexual assault and you can easily end up going to prison for four years. You get put on the sex offenders register, for most people their career is almost certainly over, and you have a criminal record with a terrible stigma attached. That has been the case since 2003. The law has previously been somewhat erratically and selectively enforced but nowadays if you go to the police with a complaint, then they and the CPS are under strict instructions to proceed with it and many, many people are convicted in court every year, including many cases that appear on the face of it to be of a wholly trivial nature.
If women are complaining about being groped in the office then it is sexual assault. That is what it is. There is no point going to HR or through corporate complaints procedures. It is crime, you can go to the police and a prosecution will follow. It may be terrifying and have devastating consequences for both you and the other person involved, but that is a consequence of the law of the land. And, in many ways, the principle of this is right. People should not be subject to unwanted touching.
What is sexual harassment? If it involves unwanted touching, then surely it is sexual assault. If it is unwanted behaviour and communication, then it is something different and not necessarily a crime. In the workplace, companies need to have policies protecting workers from such activity. But it seems to me that, because of this, you can effectively make unlimited and endless accusations of sexual harrassment, anywhere, in any forum, without fear of retribution. You can ruin the perpetrators name and reputation and end their career, as we have seen with Weinstein, without any right of response. We've seen everyone from Hilary Clinton downwards destroy him in the course of about a week.
Odd quote from the plod at the end...died for simply asking a drug dealer to move on, but in paragraph above says he chased the suspects and when he caught up with them he was stabbed. So they clearly did "moved on"....
At the same time I met my wife, another female geologist working for Shell had just married her long time partner. Even though their boss had known about their relationship, Shell's official policy was a complete ban on workplace relationships and so they tried to transfer then both to different parts of the world. Needless to say they both quit immediately and went to work for a more understanding company.
About six or seven years ago, I was at an investor dinner with then Shell-CEO Jeroen van der Veer. As the casual chitchat at the start of the dinner was coming to a conclusion, I boldly said that I'd recently watched a movie about Shell in Nigeria. What was it called, I hummed. Ah yes, Avatar.
I thought it was a pretty funny gag. (As did Shell CFO Simon Henry.) It's fair to say that the Dutch did not find it amusing. And I was never invited to a dinner with the Shell CEO again.
Certainly some of my colleagues are a bit dodgy! I have done some work for our Medical Director investigating various shenanigans, financial and clinical, as well as reports of victimisation and bullying. I have genuinely not run across any sexually inappropriate behaviour. If it is going on, it is very well hidden.
I agree that there is indeed an arsehole element in any population that can never be truly eliminated. The way to control it is to have a reporting culture, where people at all levels are comfortable challenging behaviour, and also being challenged.
Certainly some of my colleagues are a bit dodgy! I have done some work for our Medical Director investigating various shenanigans, financial and clinical, as well as reports of victimisation and bullying. I have genuinely not run across any sexually inappropriate behaviour. If it is going on, it is very well hidden.
I agree that there is indeed an arsehole element in any population that can never be truly eliminated. The way to control it is to have a reporting culture, where people at all levels are comfortable challenging behaviour, and also being challenged.
On that we are utterly agreed. Sometimes all that is needed is an early, official word in the ear: "mate, you're being an idiot. Stop." People are not always mature when it comes to relationships.
I would add that inappropriate behaviour, yet alone sexually inappropriate behaviour, can take many forms.
Certainly some of my colleagues are a bit dodgy! I have done some work for our Medical Director investigating various shenanigans, financial and clinical, as well as reports of victimisation and bullying. I have genuinely not run across any sexually inappropriate behaviour. If it is going on, it is very well hidden.
I agree that there is indeed an arsehole element in any population that can never be truly eliminated. The way to control it is to have a reporting culture, where people at all levels are comfortable challenging behaviour, and also being challenged.
On that we are utterly agreed. Sometimes all that is needed is an early, official word in the ear: "mate, you're being an idiot. Stop." People are not always mature when it comes to relationships.
I would add that inappropriate behaviour, yet alone sexually inappropriate behaviour, can take many forms.
I would agree with @neilh that unwanted physical contact is a criminal offence (though the criminal standard of proof can be a high bar). Lesser inappropriate behaviour and language can be dealt with internally.
Can people bring about vexatious or malicious complaints? certainly so, but the investigation should show these up, and they can be dealt with by Internal means.
I think I can help on clinical bad behaviour in the NHS, make medical staff carry their own malpractice insurance. That would clear the bad actors out in weeks.
I think I can help on clinical bad behaviour in the NHS, make medical staff carry their own malpractice insurance. That would clear the bad actors out in weeks.
Not so, but it would close down all obstetric practice!
Even people as negligent and criminal as Mr Tomlinson the Breast Surgeon usually go for decades without being sued. On average, I think Doctors get sued about 3 times in their career, but many are successfully defended.
Litigation is a pretty pisspoor way of stamping out negligent practice. It is not designed to do so, it is designed to compensate victims of negligence.
There are a raft of other clinical governance procedures to stamp out clinical bad behaviour, much of which is not negligent.
At the same time I met my wife, another female geologist working for Shell had just married her long time partner. Even though their boss had known about their relationship, Shell's official policy was a complete ban on workplace relationships and so they tried to transfer then both to different parts of the world. Needless to say they both quit immediately and went to work for a more understanding company.
About six or seven years ago, I was at an investor dinner with then Shell-CEO Jeroen van der Veer. As the casual chitchat at the start of the dinner was coming to a conclusion, I boldly said that I'd recently watched a movie about Shell in Nigeria. What was it called, I hummed. Ah yes, Avatar.
I thought it was a pretty funny gag. (As did Shell CFO Simon Henry.) It's fair to say that the Dutch did not find it amusing. And I was never invited to a dinner with the Shell CEO again.
Comments
I am not at Mike Pence level of chaperoning, but am careful of inadvertently abusing my position.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/17/uk-most-severe-terror-threat-ever-mi5-islamist
As it were.
10% of the population are genuinely stupid - in at least they are unthinking of the consequences of their actions.
1% of the population are genuinely bad 'uns.
You cannot tell the 10% or 1% from looking at them; there are no accurate tests for them prior to them acting. Therefore *any* large organisation will have any number of them in, and you cannot weed the wrong 'uns out until they do something wrong.
Therefore:
1) The important thing is that you react to reports of wrongdoing. Some will be false, either accidentally or malicious. Some will be misunderstandings and innocent, which can result in NFA or training. But the important thing is to act to reports in a timely manner that is fair to all parties.
2) If your organisation has 100 staff, it will have one person who is genuinely a bad 'un. You cannot tell them from looking at them, but they will be there. If you have 1000 employees, there will be at least ten. And so on.
So you may not see harassment (in any direction), but if your organisation is large and has poor procedures, it will be going on. And that's frightening.
To lighten it up a little, a good proportion (10%? 20%) of people are angels. Again they can be hard to tell, especially as the wrong 'uns can hide in angel garb (ref. Saville).
Weinstein has apologised for inappropriate behaviour, but hasn't been convicted of anything.
The law on sexual assault is clear. If you touch someone in a sexual way and you don't have their consent, then you are committing sexual assault and you can easily end up going to prison for four years. You get put on the sex offenders register, for most people their career is almost certainly over, and you have a criminal record with a terrible stigma attached. That has been the case since 2003. The law has previously been somewhat erratically and selectively enforced but nowadays if you go to the police with a complaint, then they and the CPS are under strict instructions to proceed with it and many, many people are convicted in court every year, including many cases that appear on the face of it to be of a wholly trivial nature.
If women are complaining about being groped in the office then it is sexual assault. That is what it is. There is no point going to HR or through corporate complaints procedures. It is crime, you can go to the police and a prosecution will follow. It may be terrifying and have devastating consequences for both you and the other person involved, but that is a consequence of the law of the land. And, in many ways, the principle of this is right. People should not be subject to unwanted touching.
What is sexual harassment? If it involves unwanted touching, then surely it is sexual assault. If it is unwanted behaviour and communication, then it is something different and not necessarily a crime. In the workplace, companies need to have policies protecting workers from such activity. But it seems to me that, because of this, you can effectively make unlimited and endless accusations of sexual harrassment, anywhere, in any forum, without fear of retribution. You can ruin the perpetrators name and reputation and end their career, as we have seen with Weinstein, without any right of response. We've seen everyone from Hilary Clinton downwards destroy him in the course of about a week.
How can that be right?
Parsons Green tube stabbing: Victim named as Omid Saidy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41655350
Odd quote from the plod at the end...died for simply asking a drug dealer to move on, but in paragraph above says he chased the suspects and when he caught up with them he was stabbed. So they clearly did "moved on"....
I thought it was a pretty funny gag. (As did Shell CFO Simon Henry.) It's fair to say that the Dutch did not find it amusing. And I was never invited to a dinner with the Shell CEO again.
Certainly some of my colleagues are a bit dodgy! I have done some work for our Medical Director investigating various shenanigans, financial and clinical, as well as reports of victimisation and bullying. I have genuinely not run across any sexually inappropriate behaviour. If it is going on, it is very well hidden.
I agree that there is indeed an arsehole element in any population that can never be truly eliminated. The way to control it is to have a reporting culture, where people at all levels are comfortable challenging behaviour, and also being challenged.
I would add that inappropriate behaviour, yet alone sexually inappropriate behaviour, can take many forms.
Can people bring about vexatious or malicious complaints? certainly so, but the investigation should show these up, and they can be dealt with by Internal means.
NEW THREAD
Even people as negligent and criminal as Mr Tomlinson the Breast Surgeon usually go for decades without being sued. On average, I think Doctors get sued about 3 times in their career, but many are successfully defended.
Litigation is a pretty pisspoor way of stamping out negligent practice. It is not designed to do so, it is designed to compensate victims of negligence.
There are a raft of other clinical governance procedures to stamp out clinical bad behaviour, much of which is not negligent.